We used a tape measurer to calculate the stream width from the top of the left bank to the top of the right bank. In order to find out both the landscape of the river bed and of the bank, we measured the length from the top of the bank to the bottom of the bank and top of the water in 13 intervals (3 ft each) across the stream. Then we measured the length from the top of the water level to the stream bed in 6 intervals (1 ft each). By putting these measurements together we were able to come up with an accurate visual landscape of the stream banks and stream bed.
Physical Measurements
The study location for Long Island Creek Site 6B has a bank to bank width of 35 feet with a reach of 420 ft. The steam flow decreased each week over the course of the monitoring due to a continuing drought in the state of Georgia. On the week of June 12 (after some rain) the stream flow was measured at 84.90 cfs. The following weeks of June 19 and 26, the stream flow was unable to be calculated because the velocity was less than 1. This could be one explanation for why this portion of Long Island Creek is more turbid than that of site A, which is further upstream.
Chart A5. This chart shows the discharge or water flow seen at Long Island Creek Site 6B. The * by June 19 and 26 indicates that the data was unretrievable because the velocity was <1 cfs. With further research it could determined whether the water flow is naturally nearly non-existant except when rain is present; it rained the day before June 12. However, it should be noted that Georgia was in a significant drought during this period in time.
In-Stream Characteristics
Within the calculated reach of this portion of Long Island Creek Site 6B, the study area had one low-angle turn after a foot bridge, 0 pools, 0 riffles and 1 run. There was one footbridge about 300 feet from the area in which we collected our water samples. The stream bed mostly consisted of sand and silt with a few rocks that were halfway embedded. The only occasionally debris was mainly natural, such as small leaves, and almost no trash/litter was present. It should also be noted that both banks of this particular section of Long Island Creek are located in an environmental corridor/National recreation area, so there are no homes extremely close to our reach. The water was tannic and had a light brown color during our testing period. Also, the water had no particular odor and the water surface was clear.
The left bank of the creek (looking upstream) was heavily eroded, but contained trees and some dense ground shrubbery. The left bank's main problem was the exposed soil, exposed roots, obvious soil loss, and seep slopes. The right bank (looking upstream) was eroded, but contained trees and some dense ground shrubbery. The right bank was had exposed soil and some exposed roots. Both banks contained about 90% vegetation despite the fair amount of erosion present.
Method
We used a tape measurer to calculate the stream width from the top of the left bank to the top of the right bank. In order to find out both the landscape of the river bed and of the bank, we measured the length from the top of the bank to the bottom of the bank and top of the water in 13 intervals (3 ft each) across the stream. Then we measured the length from the top of the water level to the stream bed in 6 intervals (1 ft each). By putting these measurements together we were able to come up with an accurate visual landscape of the stream banks and stream bed.Physical Measurements
The study location for Long Island Creek Site 6B has a bank to bank width of 35 feet with a reach of 420 ft. The steam flow decreased each week over the course of the monitoring due to a continuing drought in the state of Georgia. On the week of June 12 (after some rain) the stream flow was measured at 84.90 cfs. The following weeks of June 19 and 26, the stream flow was unable to be calculated because the velocity was less than 1. This could be one explanation for why this portion of Long Island Creek is more turbid than that of site A, which is further upstream.Chart A5. This chart shows the discharge or water flow seen at Long Island Creek Site 6B. The * by June 19 and 26 indicates that the data was unretrievable because the velocity was <1 cfs. With further research it could determined whether the water flow is naturally nearly non-existant except when rain is present; it rained the day before June 12. However, it should be noted that Georgia was in a significant drought during this period in time.
In-Stream Characteristics
Within the calculated reach of this portion of Long Island Creek Site 6B, the study area had one low-angle turn after a foot bridge, 0 pools, 0 riffles and 1 run. There was one footbridge about 300 feet from the area in which we collected our water samples. The stream bed mostly consisted of sand and silt with a few rocks that were halfway embedded. The only occasionally debris was mainly natural, such as small leaves, and almost no trash/litter was present. It should also be noted that both banks of this particular section of Long Island Creek are located in an environmental corridor/National recreation area, so there are no homes extremely close to our reach. The water was tannic and had a light brown color during our testing period. Also, the water had no particular odor and the water surface was clear.The left bank of the creek (looking upstream) was heavily eroded, but contained trees and some dense ground shrubbery. The left bank's main problem was the exposed soil, exposed roots, obvious soil loss, and seep slopes. The right bank (looking upstream) was eroded, but contained trees and some dense ground shrubbery. The right bank was had exposed soil and some exposed roots. Both banks contained about 90% vegetation despite the fair amount of erosion present.
Main Page | Overview | Map | Stream | Water | Bacterial | Urban Ecology | Conclusion | Site